|existentialism ° art ° poetry ° exquisite corpse ° chat ° search engine|
|( the cry ) Philosophy Discussion Board|
Posted by trablano on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 at 05:29:11 :
In Reply to: love posted by cannotbe on Monday, February 24, 2003 at 18:17:51 :
Some people understand love as the purely positive thing alone, while others mix it with sexual obsessions, with dependencies, and darker fantasies. But real love is not like that, real love is purely positive, and as that I would say that global's theory is true.
: Have you read Of Human Bondage?
: Sometimes, 'love' serves to tear people apart.
: hi people, i was wondering your veiws on feelings, what are they for? do they serve a perpus other than screw you up? for example i have i kinda theory on love. i think it could be viewed as a 'feeling' that has evolved along with your own evolution. animals have many ways for attracting the opposite sex for mating, servival of the fitest kinda thing, and some animal mate for life. this normally works well as both parents as they are both able to provide for the offspring. now what if love evolved as a way of keeping both paraents together, ensuring a better servival rate and life for the child. the more complex we got the more important that the parents don't just screw and then bugger off. early man and woman that 'loved' each other would therefor stay together and their offspring would have a far higher servival rate and advantage than others. so the early man that was capable of love gave their children better starts and chances to life, and so servival of the fittest (those that could love0 would then occur. its just a idea i came up with and i have not thought it through much but i was just wondering what you guys thought.
Post a Followup